Legal claims defining the scope of protection, as filed with the USPTO.
2. The adaptor device of claim 1, wherein each of the two or more computer code families includes a respective decision flow comprising a data structure defining the execution order of computer code within the respective computer code family.
3. The adaptor device of claim 2, wherein the data structure is an XML data structure.
4. The adaptor device of claim 2, wherein the configuring comprises converting the data structure into a flow structure executable by the second computerized decision management system based on the one or more dependencies.
5. The adaptor device of claim 1, wherein the recognizing comprises matching a conclusion fact type having a name in a first of the at least two computer code families to a condition fact type having the same name in a second of the at least two computer code families.
6. The adaptor device of claim 1, wherein at least one rule in one or more of the two or more computer code families is a completion rule.
7. The adaptor device of claim 1, wherein the first computerized decision management system is a business decision management system (BDMS).
8. The adaptor device of claim 7, wherein the business decision management system tracks, verifies and ensures that each decision is based on up-to-date rules and policies.
9. The adaptor device of claim 1, wherein the second computerized decision management system is an operational decision management (ODM) system.
10. The adaptor device of claim 9, wherein the business decisions are capturable, automatable, governable, frequent, and/or repeatable.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein each of the two or more computer code families include a respective decision flow comprising a data structure defining the execution order of rules within the respective computer code family.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the data structure is an XML data structure.
14. The method of claim 12, wherein the configuring comprises converting the data structure into a flow structure executable by the second computerized decision management system based on the one or more dependencies.
15. The method of claim 11, wherein the recognizing comprises matching a conclusion fact type having a name in a first of the at least two computer code families to a condition fact type having the same name in a second of the at least two computer code families.
16. The method of claim 11, wherein at least one rule in one or more of the two or more computer code families is a completion rule.
17. The method of claim 11, wherein the first computerized decision management system is a business decision management system (BDMS).
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the business decision management system tracks, verifies and ensures that each decision is based on up-to-date rules and policies.
19. The method of claim 11, wherein the second computerized decision management system is an operational decision management (ODM) system.
Unknown
July 2, 2024
Browse 5M+ US patents with plain-English claim translations and AI-generated analysis.